The authority to ban fireworks could change hands in Pierce County. It’s about time
Let the record show: Pierce County’s fire marshal doesn’t hate fireworks.
“I enjoy fireworks on the Fourth. … If fireworks are handled properly, and done properly, they’re OK,” said 53-year-old Warner Webb, who has served as Pierce County’s appointed fire marshal for roughly a decade.
For diehard fireworks fans, they should be relieving words. While Webb typically carries out his important job in relative anonymity — helping to oversee fire investigations and code enforcement — his duties are about to be expanded. The result could have significant implications for future Fourth of July celebrations.
Next week, the Pierce County Council is expected to pass an ordinance which would grant the fire marshal — in consultation with the county executive — the authority to issue a temporary order banning the discharge of fireworks in unincorporated Pierce County. When the potential for fire is high, it would mean that Webb (or whoever serves as fire marshal in the future) would have the power to work with the executive to call the whole thing off. The ordinance would also limit the allowed discharge of legal fireworks to just two days a year: the Fourth of July and Dec. 31 (Note to readers: Seahawks’ victories would not be an exception.)
It’s a sensible move and long overdue. As recent history suggests, Western Washington summers are trending hotter and drier, and the days when lighting off even legal whizzbangs and illuminations without fear of catastrophic damage and destruction is a thing of the past. As The News Tribune editorial board has previously written, taking politics out of fireworks and fire safety makes sense. Just last year — on the heels of a record-shattering heat wave — we saw what happens when you leave a fireworks decision up to a divided legislative body: nothing helpful.
Webb says that one of the reasons he supports the proposed ordinance is because it spells out the specific conditions when a temporary ban can be issued. Using measurements like burning index and fuel moisture content across the county, Webb said, any future decision to issue an emergency ban would be based on evidence, not whims.
“There’s going to be transparency, where the public can see the same thing that we’re seeing,” Webb said. “It’s not going to make everybody happy, but at least they can say, ‘You know, I don’t agree with it, but I understand how they got there.’”
Now, for the dose of reality that’s harder to ignore than an M-80 at midnight: For all its admirable intentions and bipartisan support, Pierce County’s proposed fireworks ordinance is unlikely to immediately solve the problem.
As Webb will tell you, Pierce County firefighters are busy on the Fourth of July and the days leading up to the holiday, and legal snakes and sparklers aren’t the biggest concern. Rather, it’s bigger and louder fireworks purchased on local tribal reservations and brought home — where they’re illegal — that account for the bulk of severe damage and disruptions, he says.
Asked about what difference the ordinance can actually make, Pierce County Council Chair Derek Young struck a realistic tone. To make real progress, people would need to adhere to laws regarding what’s legal and which days fireworks can be discharged, and — if it comes to it — the fire marshal’s directives. But even more than that, laws against the illegal discharge of fireworks would need to be better enforced by local law enforcement, and the steep civil penalties that come along with them — which can top $1,200 in Pierce County— would need to be levied far more often.
Ultimately, Webb hopes common sense along with “education and enforcement” prevail.
“We’re going to make a decision based on the best available science,” Webb said of temporary fireworks bans he might issue in the future.
“When we do, it’s going to be the best thing for you and your neighbor.”
